Wheeling Sunday register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1882-1934, 1887-11-27
THE OIL TRUST.
ROCKEFELLER ON WITNESS STAND,
Lively Contests Between Attorneys Before the
Commission.
SOME NEW FACTS DEVELOPED,
Complainant Rice COntradicts Preceding
Witnesses.

"AShlNGIONs ~. Us NO'SNA '
]. d. Rockefeller, chairman of Standard
Oil Trust, was sworn and examined be-
fore the Interstate Commerce Commis-
sion, this morning, in connection with the
Standard Oil cases. Counsel for complain
ants asked the witness to produce paper,
that he had in hand, giving list OF stocks
of the various companies, held in trust.
Immediately the counsel for the Standard
Oil Trust and for several Of the defendant
railroads, interposed objections. The
former on the ground that the Standard
Oil Trust was not party to this case, and
that the production of the paper would be
an unnecessary and irrelevant disclosure OF
the witness private affairs.
The commission ruled that the persons
who appear in the case either as shippers
or as consigners are in any way connected
with this oil trust or under its control, if
it should appear from the evidence that
the stock OF either of these companies or
any one OF them is held by this oil trust,
il will then he competent to 20 further
and show in general terms what the eX-
tent of the pool is that is controlled by
this oil trust, aud what is the extent OF
the business that is controlled by 1t, for
the purpose Of putting before the commits
sion the extent OF the operations of this
trust. That is as far "a we are at present
advised to think the commissioners can
go in its ruling.
The objection TO the list itself having
thus been sustained, counsel for complain
ant proceeded to question the witness with
the rulings of the Commission. The wit.
ness stated in reply to series of inquiries
that the stock of the Standard OIL Com
pany OF Ohio, the Standard Oil Company
of Kentucky, the Camden Consolidated Oil
Company OF Parkersburg, w. Va, the
Waters, Pierce Oil Company of st. Louis,
and the Consolidated Trunk Line Company
of Cincinnati, was held by the Standard
Trust. Several other companies were
mentioned by counsel for complainant, but
who were objected TO and excluded on the
ground that these companies had not been
brought into the case in record with matters
not already brought into this case, insist
ing that nothing in the list in question eX
cept the Standard Oil Company Of Ken.
tucky, the Standard Oil Company of Ohio
and the Waters-PierCe Company Of st
Louis was relevant to the case There
were various other minor points of Objec
tions by the railroads, which were urged
vigorously, though briefly. Counsel Tor
the Newport News and Mississippi Valley
Railroad Company, however, stated that
his company interpOSrd no objection what
ever.
Counsel for complainant said that rail
road witnesses had disclosed the names of
a number of C0nsigners aud cOnsignees
who had received rates and enjoyed privil-
eyes like those alleged to have been ac.
corded to the Standard Oil Company alone,
and it was desirable to disclose by testi-
mony of witness whether or not these in
dependent consignees or consigners were
not in tact a part of the Standard Oil
Trust
The Commission returned TO the subject
under consideration, and fifteen minutes
later the Chairman said: The Commission
is of the opinion that it is competent to
show by this witness or any other whether
the stock of the Standard Oil Company of
Kentucky, or the Standard Oil Company
of Ohio, or the Waters-Pierce Company of
st. Louis, or Of any other company, or of
any person that has been connected by
the evidence with the shipments over
these roads during the period of contrC
versy, are held by this Oil Trust that has
been spoken of Witness said, in sub
stance, that the stock of these
companies was received from
the owners, and the certificates of the trust
issued in exchange that the profit of the
several companies were not divided among
stockholders of trust certificates, also that
the aggregate of outstanding certificates
was about 800, ,0O0,0 600.
Complainants counsel proposed 10 show
that the actual value of the trust certih-
Gates was much greater, but this was ex
cluded.
Witness stated that between IS and 80
per cent. OF the oil refining business of the
country was done by his company, but he
subsequently changed this rate to 65 per
cent. Trust certificates were held in all
parts OF the country. On cross examina-
llOu NllnC15 ludl luS
whatever to do with the making OF the
rates, all that being done by the subordi-
nate companies.
Mr.. George Rice, the complainant, was
sworn and examined He submitted a
number of papers bearing upon all the ex-
onomic features of the oil business and
produced mass Of correspondence which
was submitted in evidence, so far as it
might prove competent. He was examined
and cross-examined at some length, but be-
yond the statement that his profits were
about Ia cents barrel on oil, delivered at
his works in Ohio, and further statement
in coroboration to that OF most Of the rail-
road men, that consigner and consigee usu-
ally load and unload barreled oil at their
own expense. His testimony covered IA
miliar ground.
A Scientists Horrible Death,